English and German academics’ perspectives on metrics in higher education: evaluating dimensions of fairness and organisational justice

Bloch, Roland; Hartl, Jakob; O’Connell, Catherine; O’Siochru, Cathal

doi:10.1007/s10734-021-00703-w

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such panel studies could shed light on the mechanisms. Of course, such prospective studies would have to differentiate between weak evaluation states, where state VoP is not equal to HEI VoP, and strong evaluation states with centralized research funding allocation according to national VoP, such as the UK (e.g., Bloch et al, 2021). In addition, counter developments are being reported with strong evaluation states being able to loosen the firm VoP grip on HEIs.…”

Section: Discussion Of Results and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In line with efforts by the 16 German federal governments to strength HEI leadership in the context of HEI autonomy, the organizational level is formally responsible for the (non-)establishment of evaluation and reward schemes for publications, third-party funding, etc. (Bloch et al, 2021;Gläser & Laudel, 2019).…”

Section: A Literature-based Description Of Vop In Germanymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A study of 25 years of publication outputs in the German academic profession

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the weak evaluation state of Germany, full professors are involved in the traditional social governance partnership between the state, and the self-governing higher education institutions (HEI) and disciplinary associations. Literature suggests that formal and informal governance could trigger changes in academics’ publication behavior by valorizing certain publication outputs. In the article, secondary data from three surveys (1992, 2007 and 2018) is used for a multi-level study of the evolution of academics’ publication behavior. We find a trend toward the “model” of natural science publication behavior across all disciplines. On the organizational level, we observe that a strong HEI research performance orientation is positively correlated with journal articles, peer-reviewed publications, and co-publications with international co-authors. HEI performance-based funding is only positively correlated with the share of peer-reviewed publications. At the level of individual disciplines, humanities and social sciences scholars adapt to the peer-reviewed journal publication paradigm of the natural sciences at the expense of book publications. Considering how the academic profession is organized around reputation and status, it seems plausible that the academic profession and its institutional oligarchy are key contexts for the slow but steady change of academics’ publication behavior. The trend of changing academics’ publication behavior is partly related to HEI valorization of performance and (to a lesser extent) to HEI performance based-funding schemes, which are set by the strong academic profession in the weak evaluation state of Germany.

show abstract

Section: Discussion Of Results and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Literature-based Description Of Vop In Germanymentioning

confidence: 99%

A study of 25 years of publication outputs in the German academic profession

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the rationalistic and providing logistics paradigm was considered (Velychko, 2014). The study is based on the principles of quantitative measurement (analytical metric) (Bloch et al, 2022), as well as the philosophy of quality improvement based on Total Quality Management (TQM) - (Pimentel & Major, 2016), and, in particular, KAIRYO (Mihai et al, 2014) and KAIZEN (Brauweiler & Zhakshylykov, 2020). Particularly, the metric in analytics is the value of the indicator at specific time points, which is used to measure the level of progress (Kumar & Venkatesan, 2021).…”

Section: Theoretical Basismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One example of this is the promotion of misconduct and the application of various questionable practices in achieving performance indicators (Seeber et al, 2019). On the other hand, Bloch et al (2022), based on the theory of organizational justice, defined different effectiveness of the metric approach depending on the educational environment of the country. Researchers also believe that using indicators can help eliminate informal networks of power in the academic environment.…”

Section: Theoretical Basismentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-regulation system of continual improvement of quality and efficiency in higher education: A case of Ukraine

Velychko¹,

Khalatur

Бондарчук

et al. 2022

Knowledge and Performance Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays, the procedures for stimulating the improvement of the quality of higher education in Ukraine are mainly based on periodic expert evaluations. Besides, existing metrics of university efficiency are usually imperfect due to the frequent negative effects of Campbell’s Law and Goodhart’s Law. In addition, the war significantly limited resources for external quality assurance of educational programs. Given this, the aim of this paper was to develop a methodology for an additional self-regulation system of continual improvement of the quality and efficiency of educational activities of Ukrainian universities. The study is based on the advantages of the quantitative approach, measurement methods, and algorithmization in the management system of higher education. As a result, key indicators for the formation of national rankings have been developed by different segments. Moreover, the study elaborated algorithms and mechanisms to constantly encourage higher education institutions to improve quality and efficiency. The paper proposes preventive procedures to reduce the negative effects of unfair achievement of key performance indicators. The result of applying the methodology is additionally acquired or partially lost by the university the volume of license rights for the training of specialists in the current year. This will help curb the process of mass education with a low level of quality. In addition, the proposed system will balance the weaknesses of the accreditation expertise procedure, as well as actively stimulate the independent striving of each educational program for sustainable development and continual progress. Acknowledgment To the Armed Forces of Ukraine (https://www.mil.gov.ua/) and the democratic world (https://bit.ly/3BLtuem) for the protection of the future of the Ukrainian State and its people. To the National Agency for Higher Education Quality Assurance for the possibility to take part in accreditation expertise and consulting evaluation of educational programs in universities of Ukraine (https://en.naqa.gov.ua/). Also, the appearance of this alternative idea was facilitated by the declared goal of the World Bank project “Ukraine Improving Higher Education for Results” (ID P171050), namely: to improve the efficiency, conditions for quality, and transparency in Ukraine’s higher education system (https://bit.ly/3vpx2iM). &nbsp;

show abstract

“…He found that the assessment method affected the perceived validity of the grading procedures: essays were perceived to grant students more control over the assessment process, while examinations were perceived as more conducive to reliability and neutrality. Bloch et al ( 2021 ) compared scholars’ perceptions of the organizational justice of academic evaluations in Germany and the UK, highlighting the emancipatory potential of these measures in some contexts. Similarly, Waldow ( 2014 ) compared the system of national tests after upper secondary schools in Sweden with the evaluation by independent examination boards in England and assessment by teachers in Germany.…”

Section: State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

(In)justice in academia: procedural fairness, students’ academic identification, and perceived legitimacy of university authorities

Główczewski

Burdziej

2022

High Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A considerable body of literature has documented the significance of fair treatment in terms of generating trust towards decision-makers across different institutional contexts. It has also been demonstrated that even young children are sensitive to procedural justice, and that experiences of both fairness and unfairness help shape young people’s wider attitudes towards authority. In this paper, we seek to extend these findings into the academic context. We use data from two separate studies of university students in Poland. In study 1 (N = 315), using a survey to capture students’ actual experiences, we find that fair treatment was a stronger predictor of perceived legitimacy of university authorities than were fair outcomes. In study 2 (N = 751), also using a survey of a nationally representative sample of university students, we demonstrate that this procedural effect is mediated by students’ identification with their university, and that trust in academic authorities translates into higher levels of engagement and lower levels of burnout. Academic identification fully mediated the relationship between both procedural and distributive fairness and engagement and partly mediated the relationship between the two dimensions of fairness and burnout. We conclude that the experience of procedural fairness leads students to more strongly identify with their university and thereby enhances their trust in university authorities.

show abstract

English and German academics’ perspectives on metrics in higher education: evaluating dimensions of fairness and organisational justice

Cited by 8 publications

References 27 publications

A study of 25 years of publication outputs in the German academic profession

A study of 25 years of publication outputs in the German academic profession

Self-regulation system of continual improvement of quality and efficiency in higher education: A case of Ukraine

(In)justice in academia: procedural fairness, students’ academic identification, and perceived legitimacy of university authorities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About